Story Case

Frank Jones, a minor of twenty years of age, purchased a small boat from the Chicago Outing Company and paid cash for it. He used the boat for about ten days, and then decided that he did not care for it. He anchored the boat in the harbor, notified the company that he had decided to avoid the sale and demanded the return of the purchase money. The outing company refused to refund the money. Frank Jones then brought suit to recover what he had paid. He claimed that he was an infant when the contract was made; that he had disaffirmed the contract, and was, therefore, entitled to recover the money he had paid. What should a Court decide?

Ruling Court Case. Mccarthy Vs. Henderson, Volume 138 Massachusetts Reports, Page 310

McCarthy, a minor, signed an instrument in writing, acknowledging the receipt of a vehicle from Henderson. For the use of the vehicle he agreed to pay $50 per month. When the payments amounted to $675, with interest the vehicle was to become the property of the infant. The vehicle was delivered to him on payment of $175 and after receiving it McCarthy used it in his business. About a month after the agreement was signed, the minor offered to return the vehicle to the defendant, Henderson. He demanded the return of the money he had paid, but continued to use the vehicle for about four months longer, at which time the defendant refused to take it back. Finally the defendant took the property back but refused to return the money, for the recovery of which the plaintiff brought this action.

Mr. Chief Justice Morton said: "The contract made by the plaintiff was not a contract for necessaries, nor one which was necessarily beneficial to him.

He had, therefore, the right to avoid it at his election. The effect of the avoidance by the plaintiff was to make the contract void ab initio, that is, from the beginning; he is in the position of an infant who has paid money under a void contract and without consideration and is entitled to recover it back."

It was therefore decided that the plaintiff could recover the money which he had paid.

Ruling Law. Story Case Answer

An infant has the power to make contracts but he has also the power or right to avoid his contracts during his minority, or within a reasonable time after becoming of age. The disabilities of infants are in fact privileges, for the object is to secure them from damage by their own improvidential acts, but at the same time give them power to contract for their own benefit. If the infant still has possession of the consideration given when the contract was made, he should return this when he avoids or disaffirms the contract. But if the consideration is gone, or has been dissipated, he can demand back what he has given without returning anything. In the Story Case, Jones was entitled to the money he had paid.